After far too long, I've got back into conlanging, and have started a new project that seems to fit my ability far more neatly, and has been much more enjoyable than my previous projects.

Going by the name "Project Mimal" for now (It mas "Mimil", but then *il became invalid in phonotactics :/), this language is an almost completely isolating a priori personal language. I'm describing it as Minimalist/Overkill as it is both of these in different areas. The phonology and grammar are relatively minimal and simplistic, where the actual content is somewhat overkill. The point of the language is mainly for personal use and to maybe teach it to a few friends, but I also wanted to see how compact and uniform I could make presentation of information in clauses. Put simply, I wanted it to be uniform but versatile - just not in an auxlang-y way, in a LEGO-y way maybe, but as I've been working on it, I have found I can produce pretty much every clause I could need by switching vocab or throwing in an extra word which was a very satisfying discovery. The phonology is where most of the inspiration took effect, and it uses Toki Pona's small phonology idea and general timbre, whilst taking quite a bit of phonotactics from Japanese, but the overall language is original and puts no emphasis on realism at all.

Syllable structure is CV(N/l) where C is any consonant, V is any vowel, and N is any nasal.

l > ɫ when in the coda

Onset is optional at the start of a word

Vowels are devoiced when between unvoiced consonants – e.g. 〈paten〉 is pronounced /pæ̥ten/.

Vowels at the end of words are devoiced following an unvoiced consonant – e.g. date is pronounced /dæte̥/

*wu, *uw, *ji, *ij, and *il are all invalid - ilV is though, as the l is in a different syllable.

Basic Syntax
Word order is (C), (O)S(VA) where C is the context noun, O is the object, S is the subject, V is the standard verb, and A is the action noun. There are 7 word types: Noun, Adjective, Adverb, and Case markers for Location, Motion to/from/via, Time, and Relation – but there is also the standard verb, article, and plural markers. When all types of words are in use, a sentence is as follows:

The smallest sentence contains only the subject, and is used to declare its existence or gather its attention – for instance when calling the name of a friend. The Action is required for there to be an object. Single-word sentences might also be an action. In this case, it might indicate an action being done, or an informal command.

Noun Case
Noun cases take 4 forms and provide extra information on how actions were done, or extra context for an action, such as when or where it was done.Location Cases
These can be placed on either the Context, or the Subject. On the Context, it shows where an event occurred relative to its accompanying noun. On the subject, it shows the position of the subject, relative to the object during the event.

Adessive —— “near” —— lan

Apudessive —— “beside” —— len

Inessive —— “within” —— lu

Intrative —— “between” —— ul

Locative —— “at” —— la

Pertingent —— “against/touching” —— lon

Subessive —— “underneath” —— lo

Superessive —— “on top of” —— ol

Motion Cases
These are placed on the Action and describe in what manner the action is done. Where no case is used, it is assumed the action is done to the object. Only motion related actions can accept a motion case. There are however 2 exceptions. The Initiative and Terminative cases may be placed on the context as if they are location cases. When this is done, the "m" in the case marker becomes an "l".

Ablative —— “away from” —— em

Elative —— “out of” —— kuma

Initiative —— “starting from” —— maŋ

Allative —— “to” —— me

Illative —— “into” —— muka

Terminative —— “finishing at” —— ŋam

Perlative —— “through” —— mukuma

Prolative —— “past” —— mulenku

Time Cases
These are placed on the Context and describe when an action was done. This then opens up the possibility for the Context to contain an action or an entire clause. In either of these situations, the time case is placed at the very beginning of the whole sentence.

Pre —— “before _” —— to

Post —— “after _” —— tu

Trans —— “during _” —— oti

Accusative —— “for _ time” —— ten

Limitative —— “finishing by _” —— taŋ

Temporal —— “at _ (time)” —— ti

Relation Cases
These are placed on the Context, and describe a relationship between the Context and Subject. This can include something being done for someone/thing, something being done with the help of someone/thing, or something being done using a particular implement.

Aversive —— “avoiding” —— rem

Benefactive —— “for the benefit of” —— ratora

Causal —— “because of” —— ruto

Comitative —— “with (help of)” —— rate

Instrumental —— “using” —— ro

Possessive —— “owned by” —— ruŋ —— Object Required

Privative —— “without” —— ora

Semblative —— “like _” —— ral

Instructive —— "by means of" —— rato

Article
Articles denote the scope of a noun. There are 8:

Indefinite —— “a” —— _

Definite —— “the” —— te

Near definite —— “this” —— ku

Far definite —— “that” —— ka

Separate indefinite —— “another” —— oti

Separate definite —— “the other” —— etoti

General —— “_ in general” —— gen

Universal —— “all” —— al

Plural
There are 4 plural markers that denote not only quantity, but also behaviour:

Assumed realis —— “this most likely happened, but I have no evidence it did”

Indifferent realis —— “this is said to have happened, but I have no evidence either way”

Assumed false realis —— “this most likely didn’t happen, but I have no evidence it didn’t”

False realis —— “this didn’t happen, certainly”

Subjunctive —— “this should happen”

Conditional —— “this would happen if _”

Imperative —— “I/you must do this”

Jussive —— “he/she/it/they must do this”

Potential —— “this might happen”

Allowed —— “this may happen”

Capable —— “this can happen”

These all go together to form a single word, as shown in the table below. the "o"s and "-"s show what tenses this standard verb is permitted in in the order they were listed above. Tense is added as a prefix to the verb and all three components are required.

Negatives are achieved by putting the prefix “me(m)” on the standard verb in front of the tense.

wel, jal, and rol
wel is a basic word that is analogous to “of”. It is used to show the makeup of a collective plural noun – e.g. “herd of sheep.” jal is similar, but instead shows the origin or association of a noun – e.g. “Steve from England.” It is also used for families or places of work. These are simply placed between nouns in the Noun section of either the Context, Object, or Subject. rol is a possessive and would go after the object and before the owner.

Questions
There are 7 question forms, each that request different information. The most basic of these is the confirmation question or yes/no question. This is formed by simply placing "kan" on the very end of a clause. The other 5 are the content questions:

The most basic of the content questions are achieved by simply substituting the question word in where the wanted information would go. Multiple substitutions can be put inn the same clause, and the response should simply be a repeat of the clause with all known information substituted in. If there is only one question word, the response can simply be the one noun needed.
Who (human) —— kante
What (animate) —— kanje
What (inanimate) —— kando
What (action) —— kanton

The next questions ask for context on a clause, and so are used in the context section of the clause, along with the appropriate noun case.
When —— kanja —— Temporal case.
Where —— kanri —— Locative case.
Why —— kanlin —— Causal case.
How —— kanlam —— Instructive case.

Pronouns
Some article markers can be used as pronouns. These include:

PROX.DEM —— “this” —— ku

DIST.DEM —— “that” —— ka

"everything" —— al

The first two behave like 3SG, and a plural marker can be used on them if required.

The main pronouns have no associated gender at all, and only come in singular form - being made plural with the marker. There is however a human/non-human distinction in the 2nd and 3rd persons. The 1PL is always exclusive, and the listener can be included by saying the equivalent of "Us and you".

I can sort of see the difference between the second and third, but they're so close I see little point in distinguishing the two. The latter is normally referred to as a distributive and in this case would normally be marked on the noun "melon" rather than the noun "cat".

The standard verb is a single word that describes the nature of the action. This includes grammatical tense, aspect, and mood.

This is an auxilliary verb, so why are you giving it this weird name which could easily be confused with the standard of comparative constructions?

Tense

Past —— referring to past actions. —— pa(n)

Hodiernal —— referring to an action on the same day irrespective of relative time. —— pat(u)

Present —— referring to a current action. —— _

Future —— referring to future actions. —— t(u)

Retelling —— referring to a retelling of events that happened in the past, but are being described in the present. —— wap(e)

The first 4 fine, the last one ? Why do you need that? What sort of distinction are you trying to make with that? Is it trying to be some kind of relative tense, used for events at the time of a narrative when the time frame has already been established with a past tense at the beginning? If so, why not just use the plain present tense?

I don't get what you're trying to convey by the three-way gnomic/habitual/stative distinction, and the resumptive should be translated as "resumed doing", "is resuming", "will resume doing", since it denotes actions which are beginning again after an interruption. Otherwise it' a nice list.

Mood

Fact realis —— “this happened, certainly”

Assumed realis —— “this most likely happened, but I have no evidence it did”

Indifferent realis —— “this is said to have happened, but I have no evidence either way”

Assumed false realis —— “this most likely didn’t happen, but I have no evidence it didn’t”

False realis —— “this didn’t happen, certainly”

The categories you seem to be expressing here are a mix of polarity and evidentiality (though that's already related to mood in some ways).

Negatives are achieved by putting the prefix “me(m)” on the standard verb in front of the tense.

Why do you need this when your Fact/False "realis" distinction is basically negation anyway? Is negation double marked?

There are 7 question forms, each that request different information. The most basic of these is the confirmation question or yes/no question. This is formed by simply placing "kan" on the very end of a clause. The other 5 are the content questions:

7 question forms? These look to me just like a polar-interrogative particle and a separate set of pronouns for content-questions.

The final question "how" does not fit in either of these places, and so it is just placed at the very beginning of a clause.
How —— kanlam

How does "how" not count as "context"? (Or, to rephrase that, "In what context does "how" not fall under "context"?")

Last edited by Frislander on 12 Apr 2017 20:06, edited 1 time in total.

Are the vowels and phonotactics intentionally riffing off of Japanese?

Somewhat. I really like the way they sound, and it matches well with the rest of the phonology IMO.

The first two of these fit with the traditional definition of "article", the rest are not. It's interesting that you choose to put them all in the same slot.

I put them in the same slot as they behave in the same way syntax-wise.

I can sort of see the difference between the second and third, but they're so close I see little point in distinguishing the two. The latter is normally referred to as a distributive and in this case would normally be marked on the noun "melon" rather than the noun "cat".

Try this situation: You have a herd of sheep and you have 5 dogs. The herd of sheep is a single thing, but comprised of many sheep, so the second one is used. For the 5 dogs, they are not components of a distinct group such as a family, so the third one is used. If one wishes to use the third for the sheep, they need to be referred to as multiple individual sheep. If the third one is put on "herd of sheep" then it becomes multiple herds of sheep.

This is an auxilliary verb, so why are you giving it this weird name which could easily be confused with the standard of comparative constructions?

I didn't know it was called that. Thanks for the correction .

The first 4 fine, the last one ? Why do you need that? What sort of distinction are you trying to make with that? Is it trying to be some kind of relative tense, used for events at the time of a narrative when the time frame has already been established with a past tense at the beginning? If so, why not just use the plain present tense?

It's used to describe past events in the present. Imagine the stereotypical old man in the tavern telling stories: "I walk up to the beast, and I force my sword through it's heart!"

These are past events, but they are being described in the present as to place the audience in the scene instead of just relaying information. The present tense could be used, but the Simple aspect isn't allowed in the present tense as it is un-necessary. The only times I might use a construction like "I eat" would be in the Habitual where I would say "I eat three meals a day."

I don't get what you're trying to convey by the three-way gnomic/habitual/stative distinction, and the resumptive should be translated as "resumed doing", "is resuming", "will resume doing", since it denotes actions which are beginning again after an interruption. Otherwise it' a nice list.

The resumptive was just bad wording on my part.

As I learned it, gnomic is for a universal truth e.g. "Birds fly - they always have done and always will do."
Habitual is for an action done frequently but not constantly e.g. "I used to play tennis - I don't now, nor was there a period of time where I was in a constant state of tennis-playing."
Stative is like progressive, but for a non-dynamic action i.e. something without an outcome or requiring active continuation of the action e.g. "I know French - I'm not knowing French at this present moment as I am not doing such an action."

Thanks for the proper terms for the last two. I'm not sure about "necessitative" though. It's not a thing that simply must be done. They are for commands to a present/absent person respectively.

Why do you need this when your Fact/False "realis" distinction is basically negation anyway? Is negation double marked?

They aren't double-marked. This negative is for the rest of the moods.

7 question forms? These look to me just like a polar-interrogative particle and a separate set of pronouns for content-questions

Again, a bit of bad wording. It would have been better to describe it as 4 question forms and 9 question words - I have no idea where I got the 7 from.

How does "how" not count as "context"? (Or, to rephrase that, "In what context does "how" not fall under "context"?")

Here, "Context" refers to the part of a clause. "How" doesn't fit in as it cannot simply be substituted in like the first group and there isn't a noun case that could be used with it like in the second group - this second group being in the "context" part of a clause. I decided to make it differ to the rest as it seemed simpler.